Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
. dagen: im dagen mcdowell. warren buffett lays into grover norquist. he is here to respond. connell: $250,000. is there any chance that number will go off? dagen: a company ordering workers to get flu shots or lose their job. connell: the rush to get the gifts for the holidays. it is cyber monday. dagen: just remember connell mcshane, you are getting nothing from me. talking about wider markets. nicole: some of the traders, do not forget, last week we were gaining 3.3% on the dow jones industrials. right at that 1400 mark. hitting some key resistant levels. likely to see a little bit of a pullback. the trend is still to the upside. as far as the major market average, you are seeing the dow and s&p down a half of a percent each. i want to take a look at abercrombie and fitch. , that insiders, they talk about the fact that abercrombie was the clear winner of the weekend stops. connell: grover norquist. here is what he said this morning. >> supposed an investor that you admire and trust comes to you saying this is a good idea i think you should think about it. it all depends on what my tax r
having u.s. ambassadors killed in the future. that's it. >> okay. >>> coming up, warren buffett will be here onset. also senate majority whip dick durban. jake tapper and celebrity chef tom colicchio. >> those are all great. but now, unfortunately, we've got to wait for our good guests to come on. >> we're going to lose everyone. >> up next, jim vandehei joins us here onset. >> the clicking of channel changers across america. jim, we love you! come over here! >> bill karins -- oh, no, speaking of -- >> what? >> we call him c.g. for -- >> no, we don't. >> c.g., what do we got? >> now i've got to think of something creative for what c.g. stands for. snow is falling in a few areas this morning, we're looking at new jersey, looks like the suburbs outside philadelphia and new york could see snow. getting ready to treat a lot of those roads. a lot of that eco friendly rock salt. let's show you what's happening on the radar, the pink is where it's a little bit of a mix and the green is the rain. we've set up the boundary line somewhere north of philadelphia and just north of new york c
that problem. >> warren buffett came out this week and said the exact opposite. no disrespect to you but he's worth $40 billion and is considered to be the most successful investor in the history of mankind. he says throughout his life, throughout his career, there have been many periods with much higher tax rates, it's never made a dicky bird's difference to people's willingness to invest and that the combination of reduced spending and a few higher taxes for the wealthier people in america is the perfect answer. i just don't get a coherent argument why you can't do a bit of both. >> here's the issue, is that we have never had a period with more than 1% of the gdp in terms of tax hikes since 1969. that was the last time that happened and that put us into a recession and then we had several decades of increasing unemployment. the amount of tax hikes we're talking about here, piers, are about 3% of the gdp. so you're comparing apples to oranges. you can't say well, under clinton, this didn't happen. that was less than 1% of the gdp. we're talking three times that in the situation that we're
norquist's imagination does such a response to exist? >>guest: okay, warren buffett has made a lot of money, some of it off of gaming the political system, he invests in insurance companies, and lobbies to raise the death tax which drives people to buy insurance. okay? you can get rich playing that game but it is not investing, it is playing crony politics in economics. that is a shame. he has done the same thing with green investing. same on him for gaming the system and giving money to politicians who write rules that make your assets go up. the real economy, if he thinks the government can take a dollar and you go do an invest or who does not have that dollar and it does not infect investment that is silly unless he lands on going to obama and getting money from a stimulus package and he considers that investment. when the government takes a dollar away from the american people or $1 trillion, that is a trillion not available to be saved and invested, and i am sorry if buffett can't see that but that is silly. >>neil: do you worry, fairly or not, you have been seen as you unique wizard o
. how do we come to this agreement, we keep hearing left the tax cuts they now warren buffett came out with an op-ed in "the new york times" say saying we should make that 500000 or under because two and 50,000 of their family is not rich and if the tax cuts expire as well they may be in trouble. do you think there is any wiggle room to move at 250,000 number little bit higher? >> would have to raise a significant amount of revenue so we are on a sustainable path. we cut taxes at a time when the economy could not afford it. we baltimore on a credit card. it will be required for the u.s. government on that unsustainable path. but ultimately that is what it will help our economy. david: what about the idea of deductions? even though the deadline is approaching quickly, when i put $25,000 cap on deductions. covering the overwhelming majority of americans. $25,000 cap on deductions it is 40% more than raise the top marginal rates. >> from his very first budget the president proposed limit on functions allowing people to upper income groups deduct 28% rate so you and i get the same benefits
to get used to that. warren buffett talking about going over. probably going to happen in january. i feel like we're going to go over. you can meet with all of the ceos you want to. doesn't really matter. 200,000 people in a room. doesn't really matter. norquist saying don't have a deal. have to raise taxes. democrats don't seem to favor lowered defense budget and favor higher taxes for the rich and so we're done. i think we're done. >> after durbin speoke yesterda, if you're going to get a blueprint, he doesn't want entitlements be part of it for next year. >> it's the 1,000-point solution. maybe that will change their mind. durbin said no. norquist is saying no tax increase. what else is there? am i missing something? what am i missing? blankfe >> stallen made a lot of sense. mass murderer about you doesn't mean he didn't make sense. >> blankfein, kent, mayer, roberts of comcast. is there anything these guys can say to change their tune? to get people -- >> we're just past thanksgiving. let's give it a little time. things can change. we've seen lots of back and forth. everybody is estab
tax increases will ruin the economy. warren buffett wrote an op-ed, it's a lame outdated discredited argument from the gop. stop repeating the talking points. >> larry elder, i'll give you the last word. >> may i respond. the clinton income tax hikes underproduced revenue based upon their projections. they got in less money than they thought. when clinton lowered capital gains they got in far more revenue than they thought. cutting taxes is expansionary and raising taxes is contractionary. >> this discussion still comes down to spending. >>> a man in washington who has never wavered on this issue is senator tom coburn and in 20 minutes mr. coburn will join to us vent his frustrations about the fiscal cliff and the one-sided discussion and attention on revenues alone which is driving me crazy. politics aside, the question is what happens to the economy and your money if we go over the cliff or just kick the can down the road? you're going to want to hear what our next guest's predictions are because he's a former undersecretary of the treasury and he's a serious guy. later on, didn't
had warren buffett on the show yesterday. warren buffett said raising the top marginal tax rate to 39.6% wouldn't catch any of the top income earners in america. that it would not impact them at all. now why shouldn't republicans be focusing on that, the real political battle in washington today, instead of focusing on a battle they know they're going to lose, against a woman of color after they just got shellacked in the polls among people of color and females. why are they doing this? and, andrea, a bigger question, as we go to a new congress, is john mccain going to continue to have the disproportionate impact that he has on foreign policy in the republican senate caucus? mika and i talked to so many people over the past two, three years that say we want, republican senators, we want out of afghanistan but, you know what, we just sort of stay out of john's way. how many times have we heard that? >> a lot. it's disturbing. >> we hear it all the time. they stay out of his way. are they going to blindly follow and, again, i love and respect senator mccain, but i don't want my party to
in the world. as warren buffett has been saying for the last 24 hours, are you really going to turn down a good investment opportunity just because the tax rates are a little higher in we're talking about a minor 4 percentage point increase in the upper end of the tax rate here. it's not life or death. you know, cutting the deficit and raising taxes, if they can't agree, which congress has shown themselves inability to agree. if they're not going to agree, maybe it's not the worst thing in the world for tax rates to go up and for the deficit to be cut. i think that could result in a big economic boom. >> wow. >> and then, let's say two weeks after we go over the cliff, after the 1st of january, they then cut attacks for everybody -- >> but here's the problem with that notion. it's not fine. but, john, it's not fine because a lot of ordinary middle class people -- >> that's the problem. >> -- are trying to spend money at christmas and they're deeply anxious about what's going to happen in january. and these people don't appear to have any regard for the fact that the majority of americans agree
, senator kent conrad from north dakota just joined me. >>> plus warren buffett saying earlier on cnbc saying under his plan he'd pay a 35% tax on all the money he earns. good move? we'll discuss it when we come back. try running four.ning a restaurant is hard, fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase. [ engine revs ] ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] the mercedes-benz winter event is back, with the perfect vehicle that's just right for you, no matter which list you're on. [ santa ] ho, ho, ho, ho! [ male announcer ] lease a 2013 c250 for $349 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. >>> all three of the major indices in the green with the dow leading the way up 66 points on the trading session or .5%. >>> down to the nyse floor, trading action there, bob pisani is back with us. bob, they've been watching washington but what else is on the radar screen today
on "squawk" this morning. a number of gop lawmakers say they will reject the no-tax pledge. warren buffett taking a jab at norquist this morning in an op-ed in the "times." he says let's forget about the rich and ultrarich going on strike and stuffing ample funds under their mattresses if capital gains are increased. ultrarich will forever pursue investment opportunities. >> i thought that was right. i thought it was right. we always hear job creators. i started a lot of businesses. they never make any money at the beginning. i don't want -- a great line there. i don't want to be so successful i have to pay a lot of taxes. that's stupid. that's something from someone who never ran a business. the late george mcgovern where he discovered how hard it was to be a businessman, you don't create a job. you create a job for tremendous success but you accept losses at the beginning. you never take an investment and say i don't want to do that because i'm afraid i'll have to pay taxes. you just don't. >> regulation sort of dealing with a lot of red tape which we also hear about as an impediment. >>
already shrunk by nearly a fifth? >>> and warren buffett on tv this morning saying he wouldn't sell a single share of stock even if he was guaranteed the u.s. goes off the fiscal cliff. just wait until you hear who he thinks should be the treasury secretary. >> we'll begin of course with the deal of the day. conagra foods has agreed to acquire ralcorp for $5 billion. $90 a share in cash. 28% premium to the closing price on monday. kayla tausche reported on potential for a deal between the two companies back in 2011. it creates the largest private label food company in north america. this is a big deal. >> yes, it is. it's big in size in terms of what we've seen in this market. look how excited he is. and they finally got it done. it's been one as you pointed out that was around in 2011. they couldn't get it done. that is conagra. they walked away. ralcorp stock price fell dramatically. they split the post cereal division from ralcorp. the two trade separately. so you did have a company here that perhaps became a little more -- i wouldn't say vulnerable. not as if they were committed
. >> only story you care about. >> of course. might be some mheisman voters. >> warren buffett. excellent, powerful piece "new york times" in the about taxes on the rich. he says the rich have been just beating the middle class in the economy over the past three decades. he has some great statistics. he also says this notion that rich people like him will stop working hard and investing if taxes go up is crazy. he says, i made a lot of money in the '50s, in the '60s when taxes were higher. it's time for us to pay up. a very powerful piece. >> he starts off that piece "new york times" in the saying an investor you had miadmire comesd says i've got this great deal. i'm in. you should be, too. would you reply it all depends on the tax rate on the gains i'm going to make. if the taxes are tie hioo high goes on to slap grover norquist. >> that's not fair. >> in this piece he actually says he's in favor of higher taxes for the rich. but he actually disagrees with the president at what level shah should kick in. he thinks it should be half a million. very interestingly, he says at the very, very
, taxes, things that distort economic activity. >> warren buffett wrote an interesting op-ed. he is a supporter of the president but said he does not favor raising rates on people making more than $250,000 but said he would support it for people making $500,000. is there an income level where you support or at least not oppose vehemently the idea of racing rates? >> again, you know, i don't think that's a constructive direction to go in. we -- you know, we could just keep adding ever more brackets, and ever more burdens on people who are productive or have a couple of good years in their business. i think all of that discourages economic growth and discourages risk taking and entrepreneurship. so i'm in favor of moving in the direction of a flatter tax system. of fewer brackets, lower rates, simplicity where we get rid of all the distortions that happen in the tax code, rather than speculating about how many different new brackets we should create. >> i want to get to benghazi. on taxes you talk about closing loopholes and reducing destructions. grover norquist says that would vi
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)